Delhi High Court
Kalawati vs The Lt. Governor, Nct Of Delhi & ... on 8 December, 2010
Author: Hima Kohli
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 748/2010
Decided on 8.12.2010
IN THE MATTER OF :
KALAWATI ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Manoj Sharma and Mr. Sumit
Bhardwaj, Advocates for petitioner
versus
THE LT. GOVERNOR, NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Vikas Pahwa and Mr. Asim for Mr.
Ranjit Kapoor, ASC for the State
CORAM
* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may No
be allowed to see the Judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No
3. Whether the judgment should be No
reported in the Digest?
HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)
1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Article
226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C praying
inter alia for grant of parole for a period of 3 months for the purpose of
taking care of her aged husband who it is stated, is above 80 years of age,
sick and bed-ridden and requires medical care. The petitioner has been
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life by the Learned ASJ in
FIR No. 211/2002 registered at PS Khajoori Khas, under Sections
302/307/498A/34 IPC. The appeal filed by the petitioner against the
judgment of the learned ASJ has been dismissed by a Division Bench of this
Court.
2. Counsel for the petitioner states that the order dated 12.11.2009
passed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, rejecting the application of the
petitioner for grant of parole may be set aside. A perusal of the order of
rejection shows that parole has been denied on the grounds that it was
found that the address furnished by the petitioner did not belong to her and
that no family member of the petitioner was residing at the said address.
3. The nominal roll of the petitioner was called for. As per the said
nominal roll against a quantum of sentence of life imprisonment and a fine of
Rs.7000/- in default thereof, simple imprisonment for seven months, the
petitioner has undergone a sentence of five years, eleven months and
twenty four days as on 09.03.2010 and earned remission for one year, one
month and fifteen days. Her jail conduct for the past one year is stated to
be satisfactory.
4. A status report is filed by the SHO of the area, dated 8.12.2010,
which shows that verification of the application of the petitioner was carried
out by the police authorities. The residential address of the petitioner at
Gagan Vihar, Ghaziabad is found to be correct. The petitioner's husband is
residing with two of her sons at this address. It is further stated that the
husband of the petitioner is 80 years of age and suffering from a prolonged
illness.
5. The learned ASC for the State has argued against the grant of
parole to the petitioner on the ground that two sons of the petitioner are
residing with her aged husband, who are capable of taking good care of him.
Refuting these arguments, the counsel for the petitioner states that the
husband of the petitioner is suffering from a prolonged illness and is on his
death-bed, and if the petitioner is not granted parole at this stage, she may
not be able to meet him in his last days, hence parole may not be denied to
her.
6. Having regard to the submission of the counsel for the petitioner
that the petitioner be permitted to take care of her ailing husband who is
quite critical and taking into account the fact that parole had been rejected
due to non-verification of the address furnished by the petitioner, which has
now been verified in the status report filed by the SHO, this court is inclined
to grant parole to the petitioner.
7. In this view of the matter, the present petition is allowed. The
petitioner is granted parole for a period of one month, subject to the
following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/-
with one local surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial
court.
(ii) The petitioner shall report to the SHO of the Police Station of the local
area, once a week on every Sunday at 10:00 AM and shall not leave
the National Capital Region of Delhi during the period of parole.
(iii) The petitioner shall furnish a mobile number to the Jail Superintendent
on which she can be contacted, if required. After her release, she shall
also inform her mobile number to the SHO of the police station
concerned.
(iv) Immediately upon the expiry of period of parole, the petitioner shall
surrender herself before the Jail Superintendent.
(v) The petitioner shall furnish a copy of the SLP filed in the Supreme
Court to the Superintendent Jail at the time of surrendering.
(vi) The period of parole shall be counted from the day after the date when
the petitioner is released from jail.
8. The petition is disposed off.
DASTI.
(HIMA KOHLI)
DECEMBER 8, 2010 JUDGE
pm
